Obadiah Oldbuck vs. Superman

[BLBcomics-migration]

Again just looking through some of the debatable B's...

 

Barkers Illustrated Almanac Non-sequential

Barkers Picture Souvenir Non-sequential

Barts Cartoons For 1902 From The Minneapolis Journal Non-sequential

Believe it or Not! Non-sequential

Billy Bounce Illustrated Book - Not a comic at all?

Billy Hon's Famous Cartoon Book A How to Draw Book

Billy The Boy Artist's Book of Funny Pictures What is this?

Bird Center Cartoons Single Panel cartoons. Non-sequential

Blasts From The Rams Horn Single Panel cartoons. Non-sequential

Book of Cartoons Single Panel cartoons. Non-sequential

Book of Drawings by AB Frost Single Panel cartoons. Non-sequential

Bottle, The 8 Plates (Looks great though)

Boys and Folks Mainly Single Panel Cartoons. A few sequential

Bronx Ballads Illustrated Book - Not a comic at all.

Brownies Quality stuff and cute but Non-sequential

 

Now, some of the above stuff can be seen as comics but not comic strips, i totally agree - and we say so with the code index designations i have discussed in the past, and have posted here a few dozen pages back.

 

And i repeat, while The Brownies material is "comics' like" recurring characters, the Brownies are NOT comic strips in any way shape or form, except for a short 8 month run in the late 1890s and then again for a couple years in the mid 1900s, as in the mid "oughts" of the 1900s.

 

And only ONE Brownies comic book was ever collected.

 

If it wa sup to me, all comic strip collections would be included in the price guide, all Peanuts, Garfield, Calvin & Hobbes, Dennis the Menace, etc etc etc as they are also comic books in my mind

 

Also, i would include all underground comix which were issued in the late 1960s thru the 1970s, the same as all the alternative independent comic books which entered our consciousness thru the Direct Sales Market.

 

But that is just me

 

It ain't my book

[showcase4]

Hey Bob,

do you think the hobby will ever evolve to the point that there will be a universally excepted definition of what is a "comic book"? I would think we are the only hobby that has this definition struggle........I used to collect baseball cards..this never was an issue. I would think it's the same with coins and stamps too.

Are we the only large collectibles field where the collectors within it can't agree on what their own collectible is?

[BLBcomics-migration]

P.S. No way in hell any of these are comic books. They're narrated illustrations.

The only thing I've seen that I'd call a comic book was that Yellow Kid, and even then I'd call it a "strip".

 

 

I guess I'm just in awe over the absurdity of it all. Two $20k copies sold of the current "first comic" du jour. What happens when an 1827 original book is discovered with similar sequential panels in the next few years? I just think there is a conflict of interest when an Overstreet advisor is "pimping" this out to be the very first comic and conveniently had 2 copies to sell, for $40,000. I'm not saying he sought out buyers, as showcase actively pursued him to sell them.

 

You raise some interesting misconceptions which i am sure others harbor

 

When i became the comics historian of the Overstreet Price Guide, compiling concise historical overviews and origins of the comic book business in America about a decade ago, i was not an Overstreet "advisor".

 

I was made an "advisor" by Bob Overstreet after that fact.

 

If you have a run of Overstreet price guide, go back an dcheck out the first bunch of them with the Plat, and then Plat/Vict listings. You will see zero prices listed for ANYTHING pre 1870

 

If i have such an agenda as i stand accused of by you - and others thru this thread - how come i was not "market making" listing prices?

 

Can some one come up with a plausible answer for that one?

 

The fact of the matter at hand is there was a huge comic strip market in the USA back in the 1800s - and the 1842 Obadiah Oldbuck was the first comic book printed in America

 

It was not the first comic strip - that claim has never been made, at least not by me

 

It was not the first comic strip in America, much less in the world

 

- the comic strip goes back centuries.

 

But there will never be a comic book discovered in America which predates the 1842 Obadiah Oldbuck. It will never happen. I have comics history books dating to 1877, and comics history articles dating into the 1860s, all published in America.

 

i have conducted exhaustive research into this field of comic strips for over a decade now.

 

I was already aware back in the mid 1960s as a teenager of comic books predating Funnies On Parade/Famous Funnies - when i was 14 years old in 1964 i had already discovered a 1913 Buster Brown comic book and collected more after that.

 

I always thought our "popular" histories of the origins of comic books in America were incomplete. What i did notice over the years were comics history books which repeated the mantras seemingly without doing much in the way of hands on artifact research. As the years progressed for me running comic book stores out in the Nay Area of northern California, i has a great many Plat comic books come thru the doors of my stores, but i was always too busy running the stores, taking care of customers, making a living to figure them out.

 

In 1996, after 30 years in the comics business, I set out to discover the origins of the Nile River - and i had no idea where that route would lead me. By 1998 i had bought my first Obadiah Oldbuck from 1842 and then began the work of figuring out all the rest of the comic strips which fill in the 54 year gap between OO and Yellow Kid's parakeet word balloon talker from 1896

 

The result is what comprises the listings as each Overtsreet has been published for the last decade.

 

And there will be yet again NEW material listed in the 2007 OPG -

 

my team of collector friends are already sending in new data as we enter the time span when i compile the next go-round

 

And this October i celebrate 40 years in comics fandom -

[showcase4]

 

But there will never be a comic book discovered in America which predates the 1842 Obadiah Oldbuck. It will never happen.

 

My God man I hope you're right!

[BLBcomics-migration]

Hey Bob,

do you think the hobby will ever evolve to the point that there will be a universally excepted definition of what is a "comic book"? I would think we are the only hobby that has this definition struggle........I used to collect baseball cards..this never was an issue. I would think it's the same with coins and stamps too.

Are we the only large collectibles field where the collectors within it can't agree on what their own collectible is?

 

Baseball cards are those created by Topps & Bowman, right? - -

 

Or can we go back to Goudy?

 

Or the T cards beginning of the 1900s?

 

Or the large size 8x10 ones from the 1800s?

 

I continue to plow ahead with my research, as do several hundred other comics researchers on my Plat list as we collectively figure out the origins of the comic strip on a world wide basis

 

I view those who do not agree with what has grown in the Overstreet that i compile as one views the horse who has been led to water, but refuses to drink.

 

The world of American comic books is as of this 14 Sept all of 164 years old.

[BLBcomics-migration]

 

But there will never be a comic book discovered in America which predates the 1842 Obadiah Oldbuck. It will never happen.

 

My God man I hope you're right!

 

I have taken the research too far back, looked at too many holdings, bought too many history books which discuss this stuff.

 

There are single page comic strip broadsides which pre date the 1842 Obadiah

 

there are short short comic strips in early publications which pre date the 1842 Obadiah

 

BUT, there is nothing printed in America which predate the 1842 Obadiah as a stand alone comic book - the culmination of 100s of researchers on my Plat list all are in agreement

 

And the comic strip was invented centuries before on the other side of the pond called the Atlantic

[ShoNuff-migration]

The fact of the matter at hand is there was a huge comic strip market in the USA back in the 1800s - and the 1842 Obadiah Oldbuck was the first comic book printed in America.

 

No it's not. You can keep spouting your resume repeatedly and saying this over and over, but it still won't change the fact that Obadiah Oldbuck is not a comic book.

 

 

But there will never be a comic book discovered in America which predates the 1842 Obadiah Oldbuck. It will never happen.

 

Congratulations. You've just written the single most egotistical and absurd thing I've ever read on these boards. That's a task not easily accomplished.

 

[BLBcomics-migration]

The fact of the matter at hand is there was a huge comic strip market in the USA back in the 1800s - and the 1842 Obadiah Oldbuck was the first comic book printed in America.

 

No it's not. You can keep spouting your resume repeatedly and saying this over and over, but it still won't change the fact that Obadiah Oldbuck is not a comic book.

 

 

But there will never be a comic book discovered in America which predates the 1842 Obadiah Oldbuck. It will never happen.

 

Congratulations. You've just written the single most egotistical and absurd thing I've ever read on these boards. That's a task not easily accomplished.

 

Resume? It is a simple fact that i have been in this here comics business for 40 years now

 

I was running comic book stores before you were born

- a strong theory bordering on fact

 

And there will never be an earlier discovered comic book printed in America than the 1842 Obadiah Oldbuck - simple fact

 

Yes, i have an "ego" when it comes to comics history - I earned it the old fashioned way, i worked for it - no one here knows more than me about how the comics business evolved over the decades in America. Not egotistical, a fact

 

the only absurd thing on this thread lately has been your delightful punditry contributing absolutely nothing to the discussion - another fact

 

[selegue]

Hey, even Wikipedia says it isn't the first comic book!

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Adventures_of_Obadiah_Oldbuck

 

 

HAW! Did you write that? Obviously a crazy criterion -- a Charles Atlas ad is an acceptable substitute for a Sea Monkeys ad.

 

JPS

[ShoNuff-migration]

And there will never be an earlier discovered comic book printed in America than the 1842 Obadiah Oldbuck - simple fact

 

No, that's an opinion that's not even based on a fact...since Obadiah Oldbuck isn't a comic book.

 

 

Yes, i have an "ego" when it comes to comics history - I earned it the old fashioned way, i worked for it

 

Really? How many jobs did you have that required you to be a pompous windbag...because you seem to be the world's foremost authority in that field.

 

no one here knows more than me about how the comics business evolved over the decades in America. Not egotistical, a fact

 

Congratulations, Bob. You're a legend in your own mind.

[Scrooge]

Really? How many jobs did you have that required you to be a pompous windbag...because you seem to be the world's foremost authority in that field.

 

Shut the up!

[selegue]

P.S. No way in hell any of these are comic books. They're narrated illustrations.

The only thing I've seen that I'd call a comic book was that Yellow Kid, and even then I'd call it a "strip".

 

How bout we get past this already? For one thing, there is more enough room for academic debate on this issue without having to shove the argument up in someone's face.

 

I think a lot of supermodels are simply not attractive given how skinny they are. Yet obviously there are numerous people who think otherwise. So what.

 

Is OO the first American comic book? Perhaps. Showcase and Bob B. set forth some excellent analysis. Others have some good arguments also. Who knows, perhaps there is a some edition of a book no one has ever yet seen that is the first American comic book. Of course, much depends on one's definition of comic book. Word ballons. No word ballons. Text. No text. Color. No color.

 

For me, I don't care which it is. Clearly OO is an ancestor of the modern comic book and had a role in the transformation into what we have today. It is a great historical piece of Americana and that is good enough for me.

 

AMEN This bickering on the topic is stupid since the "right answer" changes depending on which definition you use -- and since there's no "official" definition, the argument is completely circular.

 

I agree with FFB and esquirecomics.

 

I don't know why anyone would care about my opinion, but as I wrote many, many pages ago, "a major precursor to the twentieth century American comic book" (or something like that -- esquire's word "ancestor" is just as good) is a fair description. I don't think that description devalues the book or Bob's research. Ultimately, these are opinions, not measurable facts. I can weigh the OO book, I can count its pages, I can measure its dimensions, but I can't measure its "firstness". All hail Bob's research, but how can we know beyond the shadow of a doubt that there was no previous, obscure, poorly distributed book with all of OO's comic-bookness? And even if someone were to find one, OO is still very significant! The existence of Famous Funnies 1 doesn't lower the "worth" of Action Comics 1.

 

Jack

[selegue]

....

 

Here is my & Fitzgerald copy published in the 1860s/70s and still in print as late as 1904 according to the New York Times article i have uncovered thanks to Gersham Legman.

 

the 1849 Wilson 2nd printing should also have a colored paper cover, with both editions having the same image cover page on the first "title" page

 

The covers should be wrap around covering front, spine and back cover

 

With the D&F editions, there are green, blue and white paper cover variations known to exist

 

OK, I understand now. Thanks for the info.

 

And notice there is a price of thirty cents at the top of the D&F green cover

 

Danged inflation.

 

Jack

[selegue]

 

I am not casting judgement on this issue. Leave that to the scholars but I believe when we find the first periodical(comics come out on a periodic schedule, pretty much the sticking point of the argument) of a comic nature, then we are looking at the first comic book. Even if it does reprint strip art.

 

But again, I defer to the learned members of the comic collecting community on this issue.

 

I can't agree with "coming out on a regular schedule" as a requirement at all. There are hundreds (thousands?) of one-shot books that clearly are as much comic books as a book sitting next to it on the shelf that's number 278 of a series.

Flipping open Overstreet -- Batman: Death of Innocents (12/96) is not a comic book, Batman 537 (same month) is? Hard position to defend.

 

JPS

[esquirecomics]

Really? How many jobs did you have that required you to be a pompous windbag...because you seem to be the world's foremost authority in that field.

 

Shut the up!

 

[showcase4]

I don't think that description devalues the book or Bob's research. Ultimately, these are opinions, not measurable facts. I can weigh the OO book, I can count its pages, I can measure its dimensions, but I can't measure its "firstness". All hail Bob's research, but how can we know beyond the shadow of a doubt that there was no previous, obscure, poorly distributed book with all of OO's comic-bookness? And even if someone were to find one, OO is still very significant! The existence of Famous Funnies 1 doesn't lower the "worth" of Action Comics 1.

Jack

 

Well said Jack

To all of my fellow collectors on this post, I realize that some/most of you are thinking "better Showcase-4 than me" with the purchase of 3 of these books totalling $50,000 last year. For my investment to be sound and fruitful, a whole bunch of things have to go my way.....Oldbuck must remain the 1st comic book, there must be an increased demand for the 1st comic book and other historically signifigant comics, collectors must condsider it a comic book, etc etc.

 

I could have just bought a low grade Action 1 or high grade JIM 83 for the same price, and my outcome down the road would be virtually a sure thing......but that's not what drives me. That's not exciting to me or rewarding ( emotionally ). When 3 Oldbuck's out of an estimated 8 in the entire world all became available for sale last year, it was a true once in a lifetime opportunity. My heart raced, my energy level was thru the roof, and when I held these 3 books in my hand, I was holding greatness. If I could do it all over agin, I definatley would. I know Obadiah Oldbuck is a comic book, and if others don't, that's OK. I also believe that it is very, very unlikely for an older American comic book to be unearthed, but I also know it's possible...I am not quit as confident as Bob Beerbohm on this issue, but boy do I hope he's right ! Due to the rarity of Platinum Age and Victorian Age keys, it is hard for me to describe the great feeling of rare opportunity and joy, when I receive an email like I did last year (not from Bob B) saying " Hi Steve, I own a copy of the very rare Brother Jonathan Obadiah Oldbuck dated Sept. 14th, 1842. I have decided it's time to sell, and I heard you are the person to speak to".....man, when I read that email back in October of 2005, I almost fell off my chair. That's what does it for me.

 

One of my copies of Obadiah Oldbuck is on loan the Geppi Entertainment Museum (GEM), which opens next week in conjuction with the Baltimore Comic Con. If any of you have a chance to check out GEM, I promise you won't be disapointed. It is the most amazing collection of comics and other related items you could ever see in your lifetime. One interesting foot note....The Oldbuck on display there is in a portion of the museum focused on and displaying "comic books".

[infinite_comics-migration]

I know Obadiah Oldbuck is a comic book, and if others don't, that's OK.

 

And here we have the most disingenuous, hypocritical line of the entire thread! Congratulations!

[BLBcomics-migration]

Yo Scrooge,

Recently began reading the A MONTH IN THE LIFE.... thread, lots of fun comics history going on over there, less contentious than figuring out where the origins come from, that;s for sure

 

There is obviously a great deal of passion involved when it comes to the comic book field as it existed prior to Funnies On Parade. And i cannot for the life of me figure out the resistance to such factoids that comic books existed long before Dell and Eastern Color partnered up a 2nd time to issue the first modern format Famous Funnies back in 1934.

 

Is it because size counts?

 

These are all comic books to me:

 

DEADWOOD GULCH #1 by Boody Rogers 1931 Dell - all new original material, the strip began in THE FUNNIES back in 1929 - another true sleeper of original new comic strip material for the news stands back then

 

Detective Dan came out two years later - major impetus for Jerry & Joe to create The Superman

 

 

SECRET AGENT X-9 by Dashiel Hammett & Alex Raymond published by David McKay in 1934

 

 

LITTLE SAMMY SNEEZE By Winsor McCay published in Dec 1905, large oblong size, 72 pages in full color

 

 

TRACY #2 by Chester Gould published by Cupples & Leon in 1933 as a 100 pager

 

 

VAUDEVILLES AND OTHER THINGS By "Bunny" Schultz reprints newspaper comic strips from 1900, the same year this was published, Bunny later that year creating Foxy Grandpa

 

 

SMITTY #2 published by Cupples & Leon in 1929, featuring Babe Ruth,

 

 

TILLIE THE TOILER #8 published by Cupples & Leon in 1933 with 48 pages for 25 cents

 

 

FUNNY FOLKS By FM Howarth published in 1899, reprints comic strips from PUCK magazine. Howarth would soon thereafter create the news paper strip Lulu & Leander

 

 

BRINGING UP FATHER #12 Cupples & Leon 48 pager published in 1927

 

 

Published by Reilly & Lee in 1929, being all newspaper strip reprints

 

 

MAUD By Fred Opper, large oblong size from 1906, being 66 pages long

 

These are among the many Plat books i have posted to the REVEL IN HISTORY - POST YOUR PLAT BOOKS HERE! thread. Why is it you think some do not consider even these to be "comic books"? The concept "why not" continues to elude and baffle me

[showcase4]

I know Obadiah Oldbuck is a comic book, and if others don't, that's OK.

 

And here we have the most disingenuous, hypocritical line of the entire thread! Congratulations!

 

nothing hypocritical with me pal...what you see is what you get. I believe the real problem is the fact that for whatever reason, you have been on a witch hunt recently, and I'm the witch. You may just want to chill........

[Aman619]

I shouldnt bother since we all know where we stand by now, so I will just quibble with only your recent examples shown in this post:

 

they are not "comic books" in the sense that the Signet paperback reprint collections in the 60s are not comicbooks.

yes they are "books" and yes thay are made up of comics, strips etc.

 

Seems we are coming down to defining "comicbook" just as we are tring to define "restoration" in the pressing threads. If we cannot ALL agree what the words mean, we therefore cannot agree what IS and IS NOT either of them. Bob, I just dont see why these books have to be coined with the same term (comicbook) as the 20th century pamphlets that grew into an industry. As another person suggested earlier, why not create new subsets and categories for some of the interesting items you have unearthed??

 

as an aside, I recently read Gaines article in PRINT which became the Rosetta Stone of comics history. He either never knew of very many comics works that predated his lifetime, or truly considered them outside the realm, or CHOSE to exclude them in his simple timeline.. but clearly, his take on the origins of American Comics set back comics research for a long time! Everything he spoke of has been the accepted timeline ever since..until now.